“Sir, I salute your courage, your strength, your indefatigability”

Tony Blair does not want democracy, whisky, sexy:

Tony Blair has described Hosni Mubarak, the beleaguered Egyptian leader, as “immensely courageous and a force for good” and warned against a rush to elections that could bring the Muslim Brotherhood to power.

The former prime minister, now an envoy to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, praised Mubarak over his role in the negotiations and said the west was right to back him despite his authoritarian regime because he had maintained peace with Israel.

But that view is likely to anger many Egyptians who believe they have had to endure decades of dictatorship because the US put Israel’s interests ahead of their freedom.

Forget the Egyptians, who was the fucker who decided Blair needed a platform to put his repulsive views forward? Saddam Hussein must be rolling in his grave, wondered what Mubarak has that he had not.

Prague 1968 – East Germany 1989 – Cairo 2011?

Let’s hope Cairo 2011 will be more like the Eastern European revolutions in 1989 than the failed revolution of ’68. So far even calling in tharmy hasn’t stopped the protests and now the headquarters of the “National Democratic Party” is on fire and helicopters and tanks are entering Cairo. Well over eight hundred people have been wounded, with god knows how many murdered like the poor sod in the video below:



For some reason the BBC thought people would want to know what Tony “mass murderer” Blair had to say about the Egyptian revolution; if you can stomach it, the audio is here — watching the video is liable to cost you your computer. Reactions from people with actual power, like Hillary Clinton is not much better: much finger wagging, little support for the demonstrators.

Better mainstream coverage is at The Guardian. At (ugh) The Atlantic an alleged Egyptian activists’ action plan has been translated into English and it’s a must read.

Insult to injury

If this is a joke, it’s a sick one:

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair has been named the recipient of the 2010 Liberty Medal.

Constitution Center CEO David Eisner said Wednesday that the medal will be presented to Blair in Philadelphia on Sept. 13 by former President Bill Clinton.

The National Constitution Center gives the annual award to individuals or organizations whose actions strive to bring liberty to people around the world.

The medal was first given in 1989 and comes with a $100,000 cash prize. Previous winners have included U2 frontman Bono, former South African President Nelson Mandela and former U.S. President Jimmy Carter.

I can only echo Sunny’s bewilderment. Did he get this for helping liberate some two million or so Iraqis and Afghans from their lives, or what?

Not moving on



David Miliband thinks voters should stop punishing Labour for the WAr on Iraq. Quoth FlyingRodent:

The British Government, ladies and gentlemen – grovellingly apologetic for charging a few flatscreen TVs to the public purse.

But perpetually petulant with endless butthurt that people won’t stop going on and on about the catastrophic, mega-billion pound military bloodbath.

Are we living in a world in which Blair is as pacing his narrow cell at Den Haag, awaiting the verdict of the court, haunted by the ghosts of his victims, his life ruined, the last to be sentenced, his peers and former colleagues who voted for the war already locked up? Or are we in a world in which he’s swanning about the globe calling himself a peace envoy to the Middle East, the fact that he isn’t struck down by lightning the first time he said that the clearest possible proof for the non-existence of a just god, a multimillionaire, amply rewarded for his crimes? Until the former is true rather than the latter, Miliband can whistle for his clemency.

And no, it’s not just British voters who think this way, as Malaysian anti-war activists tried to serve him with an indictment for war crimes. The video at the top of the post shows the warm reception Blair got. If Blair dies in a fire it’s still too good for him.

Waste deep in the big muddy

The Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq war has run about half its course. Judging by the dominant reaction of the British press, its sole function is to prove what we all know to be true: that the invasion was immoral and Tony Blair is to blame. The surfeit of moral certainty among the commentators is suspect; the zealous clarity of their moral waters needs muddying.

So said Nigel Biggar in the FT yesterday; then goes on to muddle the waters indeed. Nigel –according to his byline a “regius professor of moral and pastoral theology at the University of Oxford” — offers up a hogwash of unproven assumptions, half truths and insinuation, a veritable parade of Decent Left cliches. You could do a point by point rebuttal of it, but what’s the use? This sorry mess won’t convince anybody, though it might make the dwindling band of true believers momentarily feel good about themselves again. This is the best they can come up with to throw doubt on the simple truth that the War on Iraq was a disaster…

If you do want a proper rebuttal however, Don Paskini has it:

Wouldn’t it be useful if there were a website which had already anticipated terrible arguments like this, and mocked and rebutted them for us?

To test this out, I used the Decentpedia, which has an extensive catalogue of arguments made by supporters of the Iraq war.

Enjoy.